I am disappointed in your response. It is jaded in many ways with
mis-information to give the 235 a bad rap and to justify only the
320/360. From here it reads like you are in need of more information and
flying experience in both the 235 and the 320/360. When your machine is up
and flying with significantly more hours than just the required test flight
period, then I believe you will come to understand more about them...well the
360 anyway. Unless someone is, or has been a 235 owner/flyer (and that
applies to every other model too), then that person may be speaking out of
turn.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:17
AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Purchase Advice
LNC2
What is your friend suffering
from?
Bill Harrelson pretty much summed it up, but here goes.......
The 320/360 is slightly larger than the 235. The cabin is wider and quite
a bit higher. I am 6' 1" and can not get into my friends´ 235. Other 235´s
might be built differently, I dunno.
The 320/360 empennage is 8" longer, probably giving the rudder and
elevator a bit more authority.
The 320/360 has an oleo nose gear strut. These were at some point
available as a retrofit for the 235, but it was a USD 2.500,- or so
option.
The 320/360 flaps are hinged at the bottom wing skin and the flaps are
faired in with the fillets in the reflexed position for reduced drag.
Many (most?) 320/360 have the adjustable rudder pedal option.
Many 320/360 have long range tanks.
Many 320/360 have fwd. hinged canopy (yes, also a few 235´s).
Some 320/360 have outback gear (beefed up mlg. and 5" wheels).
Some 320/360 have the larger MKII tail, which improves handling, safety
and cg range (flame suit on!)
Some / many / more 320/360 have constant speed props for improved
performance and added expense.....
Last, but not least, we have the numbers issue:
My friends´ numbers are:
L235/320, fixed pitch prop, equipped for VFR day. Long range tanks (no, I
dunno why either).
Gross wt.
1490
lbs.
Empty wt.
1010
lbs.
Pilot wt.
220 lbs.
45 min. fuel reserve
39 lbs.
Wife (small
model) 132
lbs.
Luggage and fuel for flight planning max. 89
lbs.
His options are:
Leave with wife but without luggage and plan for a
1.7 hour flight, maintaining 45 min. reserve fuel (required
here).
Ditch the bitch and fly 4.22 hrs. away, still
maintaining 45 min. reserve but without luggage.
Invite me for a ride (or his mum in law) and fly for 11
minutes without reserve. Don´t land (max. landing
wt. 1400 lbs.).
Be a true experimenter. Ignore all factory
recommendations; they dunno what they are talking about anyway. Shove in 50
lbs. of luggage. Bring a medium sized friend, let´s say 180 lbs., and fill
them long range tanks to the caps. Take off with all of those 1774
lbs. and practice some deep stalls. You gotta know your aircraft, right?
Come in for a low pass, leave with the mandatory victory roll and come
back for some short field practice. Atta boy, go show´em; that´s the
spirit!
I guess the bottom line is: you pays yer
money........
There is nothing wrong with a 235, in fact it is a VERY
nice plane, it just has different specifications. If you are a skinny feller
and you want some "cheap" fun, a 235/235 could very well be
the thing for you. If you can live with the weight limitations, a
235/320 is not a bad choce either. If you can find something as nice as
Randy´s, it doesn´t get any better!
If you want (or weigh) a little more on a relatively
comparable budget, you should find yourself a nice 320/360.
I am a fat guy, so I would pay 20k ekstra for
a nice 320/360 any day. I don´t like the concept
of buying an aircraft and deliberately taking it beyond factory
recommendations every time I fly.
But, then again, I am a sissy. I even take the
shells out of my shotgun before pointing it at anyone. Would you believe that?
Tssshhh............
Regards
Tim Jorgensen
360MKIIOBFB / 99%
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:32
AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Purchase Advice
LNC2
Tim,
The 235 airframe gross weight was subsequently (1998) raised to 1,500
lbs. on take-off and 1,400 lbs. on landing.
...A friend of mine later bought that very same
235 kit and still suffers........
Along with the 235, I would surmise that there may not
be very many 320's and 360's that are not exceeding the factory
gross weight numbers.
The 320/360 is only 1" wider than the 235
airframe. A little taller yes, but if you are 6 foot whatever, then
maybe you need a Legacy where there is even more headroom (and even
more fuel capacity).
Along with Bill's post, I think the 235 is getting a
bad rap on the forum.
I'm with Randy; a 235 with Lyc. 320 is very
fine. It keeps up with the best of them and has relatively low
fuel burn. Take-off GPH is 11.2, cruise fuel burn is anywhere you want
to make it from 6 to 9 GPH.
Gary Edwards
235/320
Medford, Oregon
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 8:01
AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Purchase Advice
LNC2
Purchase a 235 , ending at $50k
Enjoy 160KTAS at 6gph.
Now,
considering $70k on a good 320/360
enjoy 190KTAS at 9gph, and a bit more
room and better climb.
My question is, to most of you is $20k worth
the room, performance, yet higher fuel flow?
Don´t forget:
Gross weight 235 = 1490 lbs.
Gross weight 320/360 MKI = 1640
lbs.
Fross weight 320/360 MKII = 1790
lbs.
These numbers might be the most
important reason to find a good 320/360 MKII.
I considered a 235 vs. a 320/360 kit back in
2003. The price difference was some USD 5.000,-.
Don Gordon talked me out of the 235 kit when
I visited his hangar, and I am glad he did (thank you Don
!!!)
A friend of mine later bought that very same
235 kit and still suffers........
Anyway, I started building the 360MKII in
2003. Back then, a good 9 years and 30-some pounds ago, I realized that
the 1490 lbs. gross weight would not do. I now realize that I should have
bought a Legacy for the extra payload. - Or maybe an
AN-2......
Anyway, the 320/360MKII is well worth the
extra 20k in my opinion. In fact it is probably better than the Legacy
because of the Lycoming engine. It also looks better. Ooh, and don´t
forget that you are going to want a MKII model because of the bigger tail.
The big tail is not nearly as
dangerous as the small tail, especially if you plan on doing spins.
It also looks better.
Tim Jorgensen
360MKIIOBFB / 99%